Pigs are flying: sympathetic Palin piece in the Times
Amazingly enough, a long and almost entirely positive piece about Sarah Palin has appeared in the NY Times Magazine.
A few sample facts learned from it, some of which I’d already suspected:
She’s got the energy of a dynamo and hardly sleeps.
She’s intelligent and a quick study.
She goes her own way.
She writes a great deal of her own stuff.
She loves to read.
Here’s a quote from the article, which was written by Robert Draper:
In truth, few are underestimating Sarah Palin anymore.
And Draper is certainly not one of them. It’s hard to know what he thought of Palin when he started out, but it’s clear she’d earned his respect by the time he was ready to write about her:
One evening in late October, I sat in the Anchorage apartment of Palin’s onetime communications director Bill McAllister, watching old TV footage of his ex-boss during her campaign for governor in 2006. McAllister, a former reporter with the Anchorage NBC affiliate who worked for Palin in 2008 and 2009, wanted me to see with my own eyes the Sarah Palin he knew ”” bright and easygoing, exceedingly popular with the local press ”” before the national media had grossly mischaracterized her in a way he found “frustrating and maddening.”
The Palin I watched on McAllister’s DVD lived up to his billing. She cut a competent, reasoned, disciplined figure…
And have you noticed how much Sarah Palin has been in the news since the mid-term election?
Been around this particular block quite a few times by now. I figure The New York Times Magazine is just saving its bile for when and if she’s running for president. Meanwhile, it gets to invoke plausible deniability vis-a-vis being reflexively anti-Palin.
MJR – Yup.
Now if only the Times should just keep their hands off America’s junk.
* should = could.
I saw an article in “Nice Debs” website about San Francisco. Basically it was a pictorial anthology of the very angry street people who live within city limits. the pictures were for …..mature audiences only. However it did bring a thought to mind. In whose America would I rather live and raise my family. Nancy Pelosis or Sarah Palins….the answer required a nanosecond of thought.
San francisco is the end game of domocratic policies…there is no escape! checkmate cannot be avoided and its going to be brutal.
Mrs Palin with her common sense approach, love of family, love of country speaks for me! i would rather live in a country governed and led by Mrs palin than by Ms Pelosi.
And have you noticed how much Sarah Palin has been in the news since the mid-term election?
Yup. For a woman who holds no elective office, nor even any official role in her party, and is not running for anything, she sure does have a lot of influence in politics these days.
(Okay, here’s a question: who else in American politics can wield such influence while staying completely outside the system? Bill Clinton comes to mind. But I think even he doesn’t have as much influence as Gov. Palin does. How many Congresscritters won this year because of his endorsement?)
Her final story has not yet been written. It’s going to be an amazing one.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
1. That piece is consistent with my impression of Palin, whose Presidential candidacy, barring exceptional circumstances, I would not support.
2. Some of Palin’s high-profile endorsees lost their races but most of her endorsees won. I haven’t come across an in-depth look at the situations where her endorsement affected the result.
3. OT: It’s noteworthy that conservative women are rising politically without resorting to the grievance-based whining that I associate with the Left.
I wished I had saved the link, but someone posted here an article about the dynamics of voting. Basically, the conventional wisdom of the linear left to right model was refudiated for a “developed excitement” model (my summary, not the article’s). The undecided vote goes to the one who develops the most buzz and excitement.
Sarah Palin has done what needed to be done: develop a new pipeline of communication independent of the dinosaur media. I am hoping that the phenomenon we are sensing is that of a nation coming to its senses. It’s clear that for a wide swath of the American populace, Palin is it–already chosen.
Curtis, Palin is at 52% unfavorable. She could single-handedly re-elect Dear Leader. We here at Neo Neocon represent an elite, not the majority.
Nonetheless: “Whose country would you rather live in, Palin’s or Obama’s” would make a great campaign theme.
My impression is that the MSM is making money off of Sarah Palin.
Keep her in the news + try to look plausibly unbiased (even though they are not) = make money.
However, should she run for president I think she’d have about a second before the MSM would be crawling all over her with the SNL caricatures that are already worn out.
I think they would even encourage the idea of her running.
They’d do this in the belief that she can’t win – especially against their sainted Obummer.
Based on what I know of flyover type country, and based upon how shocked the MSM and power brokers in DC were after the last election cycle, I think they’d be wrong…..
Your points are, unfortunately, valid. In fact, the case of O’Donnell tells us something about overcoming a clear poll indication. But it may turn out that there is no choice. Palin could win a primary and she is stating that she could win the whole thing. Her political instincts are good.
What would be an acceptable poll number?
Curtis Says: What would be an acceptable poll number?
Dow 4000 would be ample.
I fully respect and understand those who would not vote for Palin. I prefer Christie, then Jindal. After them, I would vote for Palin in a millisecond, and be thrilled to do so. She’s a complete natural – a cross between Harry Truman, Andrew Jackson, Holly Golightly, and Reagan. Peggy Noonan can kiss off.
I disagree w/the argument re vote for the most electable person, i.e. make the safest vote. The safest vote is not the greatest vote. When you have an extreme political talent like Palin’s, it’s worth taking a risk. Its like taking a risk with a fireballing pitcher – like the Texas Rangers taking a risk and making Neftali Feliz and his 100 mph fastball their closer: the upside was worth it. And the risk on Feliz paid off for the Rangers.
Last, I argue that much of the voting nation which has an unfavorable impression of Palin doesn’t actually know Palin. They only know the negative caricature. More than any candidate I can recall, Palin has a legitimate chance to turn unfavorables into favorables as voters truly get to know who she really is.
Let’s give one cudo to Sarah Palin which is often not expressed. She hasn’t gone third party crazy.
If her poll numbers got to an equal percentage of favorable/unfavorable and a review of how the state electoral votes would go shows promise, the momentum and buzz that Obama had in 2008 would now be Palin’s.
No matter who the Republican presidential candidate is, he should strongly assert he will repeal Obamacare and pursue a balanced budget amendment.
boy you guys just don’t learn and just don’t even try…
did anyone TRY to scratch under her surface and who she works with, and who backs them, and so on?
or did we just accept kabuki theater as reality?
Is Palin a progressive
you realize that we are primed now to go after anyone that the people we dislike dislike?
Sarah is wonderful: Smart, savvy, easily leads, persuasive, self-made All American Girl Success Story, kills Timber Wolves for pleasure, well read, thoughtful-curious-honorable, sunny disposition…Oh, and DDG(Drop Dead Gorgeous)..!
Sarah needs to give at least one detailed policy talk that is not delivered to fans or on the campaign trail. The emphasis should be on understanding, not enthusiasm. I think a lot of people would be more comfortable with her if she could show them how she would address the G20, a NATO meeting, or a foreign parliament. As much as we enjoy her folksy style and her gottcha quips, she has to show another side or the reservations will will continue. That’s hard to do when you’re on the campaign trail, but she has some down time now.
It’s a trap, trying to sucker Republicans into thinking Palin might be a great candidate because the journolistas think Obama could easily beat her.
Already there Lumpy. It’s the “McCain” trap: Whisper sweet nothings into the ear of the conservative/Republican candidate; convince them you are on their side; run glowing pieces; laugh at their jokes; help them win the nomination as the “Sensible, yet dynamic Republican candidate;… then spend the three months before the national election shiving them in the back in an effort to help the Dem candidate.
This was the play wth McCain in 2000; although Bush bounced him in the primaries. The story picked up again in early 2008 with “McCain is such a Maverick”; but ended with “Cindy McCain is a crack whore wearing $500.00 shoes to the nail salon, while John McCain owns 20 houses and has a temper like a rabid dog with a bad prostate”.
If I was Palin, I would pass on any expose’s involving the NYT’s
Artfldgr @ November 18th, 2010 at 3:12 pm,
Back in June iirc I posted this link regarding Palin’s fiscal record in office. Here is another one.
She’s a politician, not an avatar.
I don’t think Palin is running. She has too much influence as is and doesn’t need the pay cut.
I go with the more respected Cato Institute’s report.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/gov-sarah-palins-record-on-taxes-and-spending/
“Palin seems to operate from a small government mindset, which makes her few heresies on economic issues puzzling.”
Very interesting article. A glimpse behind the curtain, if you will.
I’m inclined to think she won’t run unless she can improve her unfavorables. With her energy, media savvy, and courage I think she could be very influential in politics for some time, even without running for office. Her influence and efforts have been very favorable for conservative women and that is a very good thing.
As much as we all dislike the Beltway Insiders, I think having performed a job in that millieu is important for anyone who has national political ambitions. If she could serve successfully as VP or a cabinet member in a 2012 Republican administration, it would widen the perceptions of her as a person with the substance to hold the top job. She’s young and obviously still growing as a politician. In some ways she reminds me of Ronald Reagan who was not accepted as a national candidate for some years as he was not viewed as someone with the “gravitas” to do the job. Even after he was elected the left continued to push that meme. However, from the time Reagan gave his monumental speech in defense of Barry Goldwater until he was elected President, he was a happy Republican warrior who helped candidates and the cause of conservatism wherever he could. It took years but he finally convinced enough people that he could, in fact, do the job. Sarah Palin’s path may be similar.
My big prediction is that:
Unless Barack Obama declares that he will not run for reelection, the Democrats in Congress will make a move to impeach and remove him from office before the 2012 election. This would require the cooperation of the Republicans, who may be better served by opposing impeachment.
Yes, it seems topsy turvy and insane. But …
Obama is starting to scare the crap out of the Democrats. THEY are starting to think that:
1) He doesn’t know what he is doing. The country is spinning of control, and Obama has no idea what to do, yet thinks he is handling things extremely well.
2) He has the potential to both win the primary and lose the general election in spectacular fashion, driving the Democrats completely out of power, and possibly handing the Republicans a supermajority in the Senate.
It sounds implausible, but wait and see. Desperate people do desperate things.
Art, do you think she’s a progressive?
I’ll have to say that I don’t think so, and that my biggest question mark about her is that she may not be as much of a fiscal conservative as I hope.
Back in June iirc I posted this link regarding Palin’s fiscal record in office. Here is another one. She’s a politician, not an avatar.
I agree that Palin is a politician, at least she was when she was running for office and administering the duties of the offices she won. Right now I would say she is a pundit along the lines of Limbaugh and Beck. But I have some problems with the articles linked to by the commentor.
But Palin didn’t cut the size of government as mayor of Wasilla … Spending in fast-growing Wasilla increased by 55% during her tenure from 1996-2002, records show.
I would think that it is axiomatic that when a city’s population grows that spending must also grow, unless perhaps there is a cut back on services. Change the garbage pick up from weekly to monthly — that sort of thing.
But if population increases, revenue also increases and that usually takes care of services. Of course it looks real spendthrifty(which was the purpose of the article IMO) to cite an increase of 55% without taking into account population increases, revenue increases, increases over a six year period on what materials cost to run a city, etc. But that’s the MSM for you.
In nearly two years as governor, she has presided over a 31% spending hike by a state government that sought earmarks from Washington even as it reaped billions from higher oil prices and Palin-backed tax increases on oil companies.
Here again I find fault. This sentence says, if you parse it carefully, that Palin corrected an oil-lobbyist backed abnormally low tax on the oil companies, reaping “billions” of new revenues. Something that was unfair became more fair — because of Palin. OMG, that EVIL Palin!
So Alaska found itself with a LOT of new money and the Alaskan government spent some of it. You know, I’m a fiscal conservative myself and sure, don’t go into debt, but I say if you can afford it — buy it! Hell, it’s your money. And, unlike California and New York state, it looks like Alaska isn’t going to go into default anytime soon, and certainly not because of Palin’s tenures as Mayor of Wasilla or as Governor.
As for earmarks, I think that if earmarks are rampant and if all the states are getting their slice of the pie that it’s OK to fight for your state’s share. However, even this hit-piece article points out that …
The Palin administration asked Washington for $197 million in earmarks this year, down from $254 million the year before … ,
Sounds to me like Palin was cutting where she could, perhaps on the more wasteful and unnecessary earmarks.
There are other things in this article and probably the other linked article also that could be fisked but I don’t want to make this comment too long.
Unless you read articles by the MSM on Palin critically it’s real easy to get suckered.
It’s not far be it from me to say I told you so.
She has so much more going for her than any of the other R’s at this point it’s not even funny. But that’s for another day.
What still get me is the way Conservatives, neo and otherwise, are so critical of her; of the sniping done against her; of the alleged planning by elites to bring her down a few pegs….and a general feeling of “I don’t think she would be a good candidate; not ‘fill in the blank’ enough; she can’t win; she’s too divisive, etc., etc.
She’s a dynamo. She’s as brave as brave gets. She has all the virtues anyone could ask for, one of her sole defects being that she might take criticism too personally.
Republicans are our own worst enemies. This lady should be hoo-rayed at every turn. She is tougher than the men. Period.
If they don’t stand up soon and start talking real, and straight, and tough, I’m going with Palin. I’d rather lose with a fighter than with a wimp. I’d rather lose on principle than win on a lie.
But Palin won’t lose. She’ll win and so will, the principles. They must. The alternative is the end of America and that is unthinkable, and therefore impossible.
President Palin will do an excellent job. I am 100% certain of it.
Bob from Virginia on Neo’s other thread today says, “I was watching a documentary on Napoleon yesterday (another narcissist on a white horse) which quoted him as saying that most people do not want freedom.”
This is America’s gift to the world: a people who want freedom. And it appears now there are Europeans who regret Obama’s leadership which is implementing the truth of Napoleon’s statement.
Maybe, just maybe, there’s a convulsive jerk even from the walking-dead like the NYT who, unbeknown to them, have experienced a Jungian intimation of the coming horror.
grackle Says: I would think that it is axiomatic that when a city’s population grows that spending must also grow, unless perhaps there is a cut back on services. Change the garbage pick up from weekly to monthly — that sort of thing.
But if population increases, revenue also increases and that usually takes care of services. Of course it looks real spendthrifty(which was the purpose of the article IMO) to cite an increase of 55% without taking into account population increases, revenue increases, increases over a six year period on what materials cost to run a city, etc. But that’s the MSM for you.
Information about Wasilla’s population growth is available online. I looked it up back when I first posted the link in question.
Maybe you did not look it up. Maybe you looked it up but did not post the results.
Either possibility is another reason why I no longer feel impelled to respond to your commentary.
Here’s Roger Simon’s take on this article:
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2010/11/17/the-new-york-times-sarah-palin-and-the-gravitas-gap/
Hmm, he uses that word (gravitas) too. Is he reading my stuff? LOLs.
Sarah Palin’s biggest problem isn’t the Left per se, it is sorority-row sisters on the Left, Center and Right (like Noonan and Parker) who hissy-fit that an ordinary GDI girl from a no-name family married the handsomest man on campus and went on to live a very happy life. Makes them want to screeeeeam!
Information about Wasilla’s population growth is available online. I looked it up back when I first posted the link in question. Maybe you did not look it up. Maybe you looked it up but did not post the results.
Interesting. The commentor takes me to task for not posting results of research when he himself did not post results of research. And still has not. Tsk, tsk.
I did no research myself but instead, using only the information provided by the article itself, just fisked the hit-piece linked by the commentor.
However, I became curious. The article in question cited Wasilla as a “fast-growing” town. I grew curious — exactly how fast-growing is Wasilla? Well, it seems that Wasilla is extremely fast-growing. The population of Wasilla in 2000 was officially 5,469 by the US Census count. By 2005 it was estimated to be 8,471. That’s a population growth of 54.9% in a five year period.
http://tinyurl.com/2cp9382
The article that the commentor linked to cited an 55% increase in spending during Palin’s tenure as Mayor(1996 — 2002). I could not obtain figures for the years before 2000 but we now know that in the last two years that Palin was Mayor that Wasilla was growing very fast indeed.
An increase in spending of 55% over a 6-year period actually seems to me to be kind of conservative for a population that grew by about that much in a five-year period. Good planning, even for a small Alaskan town, requires that civic leaders look ahead.
I invite the commentor to provide his own analysis; I am afraid, however, that now that he has thrown down the gauntlet on research, that we need to see more from him than links to hit-pieces that the commentor deems the last word on the subject of Palin. We need to enter the realm of hard numbers that can’t be misinterpreted through the distorted lens of lefty journalism.
Either possibility is another reason why I no longer feel impelled to respond to your commentary.
Which is fine with me. It’s a free country and a free internet. No one HAS to respond to anything.
I noted in the last bit that Robert Draper, who wrote this article, is a Southerner.
That makes a difference. Most Southern liberals (assuming he is one) are less reflexively hostile to small-towners, guns, and good old gals. I’m guessing that’s part of his openness to her: the Sniffy Factor might be absent.
And it’s an interesting take on an interesting person.
And there’s this, from the article:
Palin has taken steps to close the substance gap. As Davis put it to me, “She works very hard to get things right, because she understands the margin for error – and because it’s the right thing to do.”
In Hong Kong 14 months ago, Palin delivered a dense world-affairs speech that she co-drafted with Randy Scheunemann and Rebecca Mansour. This past June in Norfolk, Va., Palin ripped Obama’s “enemy-centric” foreign policy in a spicy but detailed address.
Sarah Palin, the more one honestly vets her, only shows for the better.
I think this is true because more than anything her life has been about hard work and effort–something that scares liberals even more than George Bush, oil wells, and non-white conservatives.
Anybody can succeed with hard work over time. Sarah isn’t extraordinarily gifted with talent, but with gumption. And those type of people accumulate ability and get better and better. Her life has juice, verve, message: Get off your welfare duff and do something.
It goes back to the freedom message. Freedom costs in sweat and effort. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were industrious. They were both physical. Washington, the surveyor, put long days in the saddle. Lincoln split rails and enjoyed wrestling matches. They were healthy and loved labor. And they dedicated their labor to our country.
Freedom gained by one’s own labor is antithetical to all those who voted for Obama and to all those who are afraid of work. People whose lives are especially marked with such a trait are an open rebuke to those who know in their hearts they are lazy.
I remember well when I saw first saw Palin; it was her acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. Frankly, a tingle ran up my leg.
Here finally was charismafrom someone NOT of the Left. Here was magnetism that was the antithesis of the smooth, polished and carefully packaged Obama, someone on the national scene for the first time in my experience who was exuding attractive and unapologetic patriotism, uncensored by the contempt that is inherent in the Left’s view of American history. Here was the schoolmarm of the prairie school, here was a Norman Rockwell cover, here was enthusiasm and real energy. And to top it off she was pretty.
She needs to be able to handle the hostile, condescending interviews from the MSM that would come her way if she were to run for POTUS. Of course, her opponent would be sure to get only softballs thrown their way by the Katie Courics of our country, that’s a given in our politics. Promote the Left and hammer the Right is the unspoken agenda.
I think she has found a way to mostly bypass these ambushes by using twitter, Facebook, op eds and speeches. But I don’t think she can ignore the MSM entirely. Too many folks get their news from the MSM. If I were her I would insist only on live interviews so they don’t get a chance to edit out the parts that put her in a favorable light or broadcast video snippets of her out of context with viewers being kept unaware of what really happened.
gs was just smacked down.
OK – I’m just teasing.
Good work Grackle.
It’s human nature to be “STUCK” in your position. GS seems to have an extremely negative outlook on Sarah. She can do NOTHING right.
It’s a lack of clarity gs.
NOBODY here is saying that she’s the best candidate for pres.
We are saying given the choices – she may be the best choice. Obama vs. Palin = hands down Palin.
We are all realists here.
Thanks, Baklava. Here’s an interesting article about the viability of a Palin run against Obama.
http://tinyurl.com/243jplj
That’s a pretty fair article to me.
btw, I’d prefer Chris Christie or Bobby Jindal would be preferred to me.
horrible grammar. sorry.
Baklava I ain’t got no grammer myself sometimes. I like Palin but I also like others. Marco Rubio is interesting. Check this video out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbaP0Jzd6QA
1. Baklava Says: gs was just smacked down.
OK – I’m just teasing.
I was telling myself that few in this community, whether proPalin or antiPalin, would be persuaded by grackle’s discussion of Wasilla’s population.
So I’m relieved that you’re just teasing.
2. grackl Says: I could not obtain figures for the years before 2000…
I did.
… but we now know that in the last two years that Palin was Mayor that Wasilla was growing very fast indeed.
I’ll return to this, and to other parts of grackle’s comment, later.
Pingback:Sarah Palin’s Reality TV Debut « Sake White
gs, do you expect a budget for a city with a population growth of 55% to stay the same?
What are you expecting?
Why are you doing this?
If your motive is to convince us she’s a lefty big government type – you probably won’t.
It’s about perspective.
Baklava, I sincerely appreciate the support and viewpoint; like anyone else I like it when someone agrees with me, but the commentor is within his rights to disagree on an issue. I don’t question his motive — motives are not what matter — just the facts and the interpretation thereof. Good ol’ Sgt. Friday — “Just the facts, ma’am.”
I have been wrong on issues many times in my life and have had my mind changed, or at least had the beginnings of a mind-change, by comments on this blog and others. For instance on immigration, which I used to be pretty blasé about. Also, Obama himself, which I used to think of as an ordinary liberal. Whew!
Objectivity begins with the thought that I could be wrong. Maybe Palin is a spendthrift. Right now I don’t think so but no one is infallible, least of all — me — or Palin, for that matter. The commentor may bring something valuable to this table of discussion. But this time he needs to post links to some fact-based sites — census data, etc.
I am leaving now for the weekend to visit friends who barely know what the internet is and wouldn’t dream of spending time and good money on a computer. They won’t buy a TV either — wouldn’t own one if someone tried to give them one. The pain of technology withdrawal will be smothered by the warmth of old friends. But I will check the comments when I return Monday.
I have found (at least) two data sets that lead to contradictory conclusions about Palin’s spending as mayor (subject to checking my arithmetic, which is awful). Each would be credible if it were the only data available.
Maybe the original data sources, as available, will dispel some of the ambiguity. Having already spent longer than intended on the topic, I have to pause. I will follow through when time is available.